If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

View Poll Results: When will you say/admit that the Knicks are a better team without Stephon Marbury?

Voters

23. You may not vote on this poll

If the Knicks get to ten games over .500 in games played without him

28.70%

... 5 games over .500 in games played without him

14.35%

... get to .500 in games played without him

313.04%

No matter how much they win or lose they're already better.

939.13%

Just coincidence/bad luck that its happened for the 4th time in his career, should change his #to 13

00%

Pfft you know nothing about basketball, he is and always will be Starbury so **** all you haters.

yeah people really gotta get that imaginary picture outta their head that marbury is a selfish player. You proved it wit those stats. Why do the haters hate???

For many reasons:

hip hop image

Stephen A smith

Peter Vecsey

race

the $ hes gettin paid

interviews over the summer

because everyone else does

He left the team even though we dont know everything that happened

Had a bad year with Larry Brown (shouldnt count anything from that season

You know what reason I hate it when they use it? When they talk about teams gettin better after he leaves. If you look at it like an idiot then yes it appears that way. But if you looker deeper into things then you realize other reasons why they got better.

Twolves-KG bein 1 year older, thats what most young players do they get better from one year to the next

Nets-Kmart was a rookie when Marbury played and the the acquistion of Richard Jefferson

Suns-Amare Stoudamire was in his 2nd season when Marbury got traded.

It can just as easily be argued that had Marbury stayed on any of these teams they would have been better the following year.

thats a big one! people gotta watch him play some games before they judge and join a crowd.

Watch-steph's guna get traded from NY and we make a key aquisition-that gets us to the finals-lets say. Everyone's suddenly guna forget about the star we recieved-and just focus on how we got the bum marbury out of new york.

And the other way around also, if he stays a few more years-and we make a move that gets us to the finals and lose-the talk would be-we could have won if it wasnt for marbury killing our chemistry-when they dont notice some retarted shot that zach takes or whatever the case.

KnicksDlee42, we did a good job of holdin it down without Metro here. Props to Pricey and ABCD. Team Starbury gets the win by providing more stats. We won but if Metro was here it wouldve been a Kimbo slice. Instead, its just a knockout.

KnicksDlee42, we did a good job of holdin it down without Metro here. Props to Pricey and ABCD. Team Starbury gets the win by providing more stats. We won but if Metro was here it wouldve been a Kimbo slice. Instead, its just a knockout.

You make a good point,Eddy Curry House Special,but the Knicks have a lot of winning to do before they can say the are better without Mabury. A 12-26 record is still not reliable enough to say they are better without him.

This doesnt add up to me, Isiah obviously has something against Marbury and is going out of his way to be an ******* to him.

isiah gave the marbury the throne when he first arrived here, everybody marbury disliked was shipped out of here(kurt thomas, van horn and mutombo), and if u dotn know why marbury was benched then u must have forgotten that marbury was getting outplayed by average players, the one that i remember clearly was that game vs maimi where steph threw the ball away and allowed Jason williams to hit a game winner

isiah gave the marbury the throne when he first arrived here, everybody marbury disliked was shipped out of here(kurt thomas, van horn and mutombo), and if u dotn know why marbury was benched then u must have forgotten that marbury was getting outplayed by average players, the one that i remember clearly was that game vs maimi where steph threw the ball away and allowed Jason williams to hit a game winner

I already addresed this. Crawford was worse then Marbury and Isiah didnt trade those players because of Marbury, he traded them because hes an idiot. Dont be an Isiahsexual, stop defendin him.

yeah people really gotta get that imaginary picture outta their head that marbury is a selfish player. You proved it wit those stats. Why do the haters hate???

Did we all imagine Marbury leaving the team and flying back to NY when he found out that he wasn't going to start? I'm not saying that it's Marbury's fault that the Knicks have been losing since he's gotten here. I'm saying that the shoot first point guard or scoring PG doesn't work for this team so there's no place for Marbury on this team. The Knicks are better with out Marbury.

I tried to view this from every objective angle, from 'he's the best scorer on the team' to 'he's a born scorer let him play the two'. But the problem is his ego wont let him be a third scoring option. Reports have surfaced that several players have had issues with Marbury indicating that his presence is disruptive in the locker room. Marbury does more harm then good and sadly his time is up. I don't see how we can improve with Marbury as our floor general.

If this is the case then why are none of the Knicks coming out and saying this? Why do the other players when on the court celebrate and acknowledge Marbury when he does team things or does something good out there? it doesnt add up. Did u see how the players reacted to Marbury when he drew a few fouls in the last against Chicago and then hit the winning 3 pointer? The players know he has been playing injured and i bet they respect him for that.
We always go on about the plane incident and i think we all admit he shouldnt have left his team, even if we dont know 100&#37; the story. we all make mistakes, i dont think u can tell me 1 player in the league that has never done anything wrong in there careers, WE R ALL HUMAN.
Sure he is probably overpaid but why should he turn the cash down? he didnt ask for that sum, if the Knicks are stupid enough to offer a sum like that then its managements fault, not Marburys.
The thing i like about Marbury is he loves NY, he hasnt even said he wants to die a Knick. he plays for this organisation injured, he plays for a coach that doesnt like him and he does his business.
He is Loyal to the organisation, unlike fkheads that shop around trying to get traded or go free agent to another team to win a championship. No loyalty in basketball which annoys Australians.

thats my spill, i dont even love Marbury but i get tired off people kicking people when they r down or arent given a 2nd chance.

It is pretty clear his only affiliation to this team is by contract. Seeing as Thomas doesn't want him around, the players aren't saying they miss him, and with him getting booed at MSG when they showed his face on the titantron during the Win vs Wizards....He's not a Knick anymore, so I think its time to move on. It's in the past now.

Say what you want about him, but the bottom line is that the Knicks didn't do anything while he was here, and thats all that counts. The bad off court problems that occurred while he was here will probably be remembered even more. If the Knicks were winning, they wouldn't be the case, but we can't rewrite history.

We sucked while he was the focal point. And we still suck with him away.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that this argument is a stalemate.

Crawford is the new face of the franchise, so its his turn to start being the player that gets all the heat. As for Marbs, he's just an expiring contract for the Knicks to find a buyer for.

My only knock on Marbury is that hes not a vocal leader. I think hes a leader on the court but not in the locker room. At the same time, who said the point guard has to be the leader? Theres alot of teams that have leaders at other positions besides pg:

It is not necessary for a pg to be a leader but when he's your best player, not to mention only established veteran, he better well be. His shortcomings as a leader to me is the biggest, most accurate knock on Marbury.

One thing you do not do with a guy who is not a leader is, make him the franchise. From the moment he got here this has been Stephon Marbury's team and whatever you want to say about him as a player is fine, but one thing that can not be denied is that he is not a leader. However, I don't really blame Stephon for this. If a good actor is cast in a bad role do you necessarily blame the actor or do you you blame, the agent, director etc etc for casting him in it?

Stephon Marbury was never cut out to play the role of a franchise player and this is what he was asked to do here in New York. I blame Isiah Thomas for this because he's the one that brought Steph here, gave him the keys and said this is your house. What Thomas should've done is said here Steph you could have a wing in the house but it's not fully yours. Soon I'll be drafting, signing or trading for someone who's house it will be. Instead dickhead Isiah gave Steph the house, then took it back from him to give to Eddy 'I-Hop' Curry and the rest is history

Originally Posted by MSGKnickz33

For many reasons:

hip hop image

Stephen A smith

Peter Vecsey

race

the $ hes gettin paid

interviews over the summer

because everyone else does

He left the team even though we dont know everything that happened

Had a bad year with Larry Brown (shouldnt count anything from that season

You left out the number one reason people hate on Steph, that along with Isiah Thomas, he is the face of the worst era in New York Knick history. Every casual basketball fan knows who Marbury is so if the Knicks are going to be among the worst teams in basketball he is the guy that will be blamed. Casual fans don't know that Steph's a very very good player but not great. They see his face all the time so they think he's supposed to be like the Ewing's of the world but he's not like that because he's not on the same level as a player. In many ways I feel sorry for Marbury. I can't waite until a book comes out with all the locker room stories of what really went on during his time year.

If we were gonna be bad, I'm glad that with Marbury we were at least interesting as opposed to some other bad teams who are boring as all hell. Does anybody remember any of the guys that were on those horrible Bulls teams after Jordan left? I never thought you could die watching basketball until I watched those teams.

The twolves example isn't really fair but the Nets were a 50+ loss team while Marbury was there then Kidd comes in and boom Nets win 50+ and go to the finals. I know other **** went down but guys ya gotta admit, it doesn't look good. The Suns one is interesting because sometimes I think people forget that the Suns were a playoff team with Marbury but Marion and Stoudamire hated Steph so I dunno. I think the thing with Phoenix is that how good Steve Nash is has made Marbury look that much worse.

Originally Posted by MSGKnickz33

KnicksDlee42, we did a good job of holdin it down without Metro here. Props to Pricey and ABCD. Team Starbury gets the win by providing more stats. We won but if Metro was here it wouldve been a Kimbo slice. Instead, its just a knockout.

Dude you gotta stop with the stats, pro sports and life in general is about a lot more then numbers. Also the kimbo slice I guess is something ya'll do on here but it's kind of ghey. It sounds like something you'd do to a grapefruit, sorry.

Originally Posted by abcd

You make a good point,Eddy Curry House Special,but the Knicks have a lot of winning to do before they can say the are better without Mabury.

No doubt, theyd have a lot of winning to do even if they'd asked Jesus, and even he said the Knicks are better without Marbury

Originally Posted by Pricey

Crawford to start getting the heat? that started a long time ago hahahaha.
Hopefully he can continue playing like the last few games.
I heard that the Cavs are interested in him?

Yeah I read that they offered a package centered around Larry Hughes .

I actually believe that the Knicks are not necessarily better without Steph, but they are playing better as a team without him. It's like with Zach Randolph. Zach provides double digit rebounds and somewhat consistant jump shot, however, certain things he does on the court, sometime prevents the Knicks from optimizing his positive traits.

I believe that Stephon Marbury can be an asset to this team still. But not in a starting role. As it stands right now, and especially so if the Knicks continue to win without steph, Steph's role as the leading guard/player on this team has deminished. But his skills can still be utilized if he understands and accepts his new role when he finally does come back.

No one, who is objective, can say Marbury's skills are not still one of if not the best on the team. When focused on actualy playing the game and not on extra curriculr bull****, Marbury is still a real good player, and having that player, even if its in a more limited role, can only help to further the progress of the team.

Zach Randolph, during this 3 game win streak, has shown that maybe he is trying work within the team. Besides stretches of the black hole Zach, he has been passing out more and even trying on the defensive end and playing within his game. If Marbury comes back and is able to do the same, and be a distraction I believe the Knicks can continue its winning ways